Fisheries of the Northeastern United States; Amendment 1 to the Atlantic Herring Fishery Management Plan, 56446-56467 [06-8263]

Agencies

• DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
• National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 187 (Wednesday, September 27, 2006)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 56446-56467]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 06-8263]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

50 CFR Part 648

[Docket No.060901235-6235-01; I.D. 082406C]
RIN 0648-AQ87


Fisheries of the Northeastern United States; Amendment 1 to the 
Atlantic Herring Fishery Management Plan

AGENCY:  National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

ACTION:  Proposed rule, request for comments.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY:  NMFS proposes regulations to implement measures in Amendment 
1 to the Atlantic Herring Fishery Management Plan (FMP). Amendment 1 
was developed by the New England Fishery Management Council (Council) 
to establish a limited access program, and to make other changes in the 
management of the Atlantic herring fishery. The Amendment 1 measures 
being proposed include: A limited access program; an open access 
incidental catch permit; a change in the management area boundaries; 
establishment of a purse seine/fixed gear-only area; establishment of a 
maximum sustainable yield (MSY) proxy; an approach to determining the 
distribution of area-specific Total Allowable Catches (TACs); a multi-
year specifications process; a research quota set-aside for herring-
related research; a set-aside for fixed gear fisheries; a change in the 
midwater trawl gear definition; and additional measures that could be 
implemented through the framework adjustment process. The intent of 
this action is to provide efficient management of the Atlantic herring 
fishery and to meet conservation objectives.

DATES:  Public comments must be received (see ADDRESSES) no later than 
5 p.m. eastern daylight time on November 13, 2006.

ADDRESSES:  Copies of supporting documents used by the Council, 
including the Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (FSEIS) 
and Regulatory Impact Review (RIR)/Initial Regulatory Flexibility 
Analysis (IRFA), are available from Paul J. Howard, Executive Director, 
New England Fishery Management Council, 50 Water Street, Mill 2, 
Newburyport, MA 01950. The FSEIS/RIR/IRFA is accessible via the 
Internet at http:/www.nero.nmfs.gov.
    Written comments on the proposed rule may be sent by any of the 
following methods:
     Mail to Patricia A. Kurkul, Regional Administrator, NMFS, 
Northeast Regional Office, One Blackburn Drive, Gloucester, MA 01930. 
Mark the outside of the envelope ``Comments Herring Amendment 1''
     Fax to Patricia A. Kurkul (978) 281-9135;
     E-mail to the following address: HerrAmend1@noaa.gov. 
Include in the subject line of the e-mail comment the following 
document identifier: ``Comments HerrPropRuleAmend1.''
     Electronically through the Federal e-Rulemaking portal: 
https://www.regulations.gov.
    Written comments regarding the burden-hour estimates or other 
aspects of the collection-of-information

[[Page 56447]]

requirements contained in this proposed rule should be submitted to the 
Regional Administrator at the address above and by e-mail to David--
Rotsker@omb.eop.gov, or fax to (202) 395-7285.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:  Eric Jay Dolin, Fishery Policy 
Analyst, (978) 281-9259, fax (978) 281-9135.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The primary purpose of Amendment 1 is to 
modify the management program for the Atlantic herring fishery by 
implementing a limited access program to better match the capacity of 
the fleet to the resource. The amendment also would modify other 
management measures so that the Atlantic herring resource is managed 
more efficiently and sustainably.
    In July 1999, the Council voted to develop a limited or controlled 
access program for the herring fishery, and NMFS, at the request of the 
Council, established September 16, 1999 (64 FR 50266), as a control 
date for the Atlantic herring fishery in Federal waters. Scoping 
meetings for an amendment to FMP were conducted in February 2000, 
shortly after completion of the FMP, with public hearings taking place 
that month in Maine, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and New Jersey. In 
April 2003, the Council re-initiated scoping, holding public hearings 
in April and May of that year in Maine, Massachusetts, and New Jersey.
    During both rounds of scoping, comments were sought on limited/
controlled access in the herring fishery, particularly in Area 1A, the 
inshore Gulf of Maine (GOM), because at that time the concern about 
excess capacity in the fishery was focused on Area 1A. The TAC in this 
area has represented at least 60 percent of the total landings of this 
fishery since the FMP was implemented, and the area has been closed to 
directed fishing because the TACs for that area was caught every year. 
As a result, the Council concluded that the capacity in this area 
should be restricted to avoid problems that result from excess fishing 
capacity, such as a race to fish as increasing numbers of vessels try 
to catch herring before the TAC is attained and the directed fishery is 
closed.
    Although TACs in Areas 1B, 2, and 3 (southern New England, the Mid-
Atlantic, and Georges Bank (GB), have not been fully harvested since 
the implementation of the FMP (with the exception of Area 1B during the 
2001 and 2004 fishing years), the Council concluded that sufficient 
capacity currently exists for the fleet to harvest the TACs in those 
areas, and this amendment proposes a limited access program for these 
areas as well. By taking such action now, the Council hopes to avoid 
future problems with excess capacity in these areas.
    During the development of Amendment 1, both as a result of issues 
raised by the Council and by the public during scoping, a variety of 
elements were added to Amendment 1, all of which are intended to 
improve the management of the fishery and contribute to the 
sustainability of the stock. These include an open access incidental 
catch permit; a change in the management area boundaries; establishment 
of a purse seine/fixed gear-only area (PS/FG); establishment of an MSY 
proxy; an approach to determining the distribution of area-specific 
TACs; a multi-year specifications process; a research quota set aside 
for herring-related research; a set-aside for fixed gear fisheries; the 
inclusion of the Maine fixed gear fishery catch in New Brunswick weir 
fishery catch; measures to address bycatch of multispecies in the 
herring fishery; a change in the midwater trawl gear definition; and 
additional measures that can be implemented through the framework 
adjustment process.

Relation to Existing Herring Regulations

    In Amendment 1, the Council noted that it intended to maintain 
existing herring management measures in effect unless they were 
explicitly revised in Amendment 1. However, NMFS is proposing to revise 
existing provisions in Sec.  648.13 related to the transfer of fish at 
sea in order to enforce the possession restrictions proposed in 
Amendment 1. These revisions do not make any substantive change to the 
regulations, nor do they apply any requirements beyond those proposed 
by the Council. They simply make it clear that the possession limits 
proposed in Amendment 1 apply whether the permitted herring vessel is 
landing on shore or transferring at sea. /NMFS invites public comment 
on these revisions in order to ensure that they are consistent with the 
Council's intent in creating the varying possession restrictions.
    Amendment 1 would establish four classes of vessel permits with 
associated possession limits: (1) The limited access permit for all 
areas would authorize a vessel to harvest herring from any herring 
management area without possession restrictions until 95 percent of the 
management area TAC is attained; (2) the limited access permit for 
Areas 2 and 3 would authorize a vessel to harvest herring from those 
management areas without possession restrictions until 95 percent of 
the management area TAC is attained; (3) the limited access incidental 
catch permit would authorize a vessel to harvest up to 55,000 lb (25 
mt) of herring per trip (with one landing allowed per calendar day) 
from any herring management area until 95 percent of the management 
area TAC is attained; and (4) the open access incidental catch permit 
would authorize a vessel to harvest up to 6,600 lb (3 mt) of herring 
per trip (with one landing allowed per calendar day) from any area 
until 95 percent of the management area TAC is attained. Upon 
attainment of 95 percent of any management area TAC, the directed 
fishery would be closed and all herring vessels would be limited to 
2,000 lb (907.2 kg) of herring per trip harvested from that area (with 
only one landing allowed per calendar day).
    To assure that vessels harvest herring only as authorized by the 
conditions of their vessel permit, NMFS proposes to specify that the 
transfer of fish at sea can occur only if the vessel transferring the 
herring complies with the possession limit restrictions outlined above. 
This is intended to assure that the provision maintains the integrity 
of the possession limits.
    In addition, NMFS notes that some of the restrictions currently 
specified in Letters of Authorization (LOAs) for transferring herring 
at sea and serving as a carrier for herring were not reflected in the 
regulations. To rectify this inconsistency, NMFS has added text to the 
regulations to reflect all of the requirements of the LOAs.
    Finally, NMFS has revised the permitting requirements for at-sea 
processing vessels. The existing herring regulations require such 
vessels to be issued a vessel permit for at-sea processing. In 
addition, such vessels are subject to dealer reporting requirements in 
Sec.  648.7(a). This proposed rule would require at-sea processing 
vessels to obtain dealer permits rather than vessel permits. This would 
be consistent with the reporting requirement, and with the at-sea 
processor requirement of the Atlantic mackerel fishery.

Particular Issues of Concern

    NMFS requests particular scrutiny of the regulations at Sec.  
648.200(b)(3) concerning the specification of TAC reserves in the 
specifications-setting process. As currently written, the regulations 
allow the Council to set aside a reserve of herring from any of the 
management areas, to be allocated at the discretion of the Regional 
Administrator based on the progress of the fishery toward the 
utilization of the area TACs. Because the reserve has

[[Page 56448]]

never been tapped, and in recent years the Council has not elected to 
set a reserve, NMFS requests the Council and the public to consider the 
need to maintain the reserve option as part of the specifications 
process.

Background

    At its final meeting for Amendment 1, the Council separated the 
measures to address bycatch in the herring fishery from Amendment 1 to 
the FMP, and agreed to submit these measures separately as Framework 43 
to the Northeast Multispecies FMP (Framework 43). The measures 
contained in Framework 43 were included in the Draft Supplemental 
Environmental Impact Statement (DSEIS) and public hearing document for 
Amendment 1 to the Atlantic Herring FMP. The Council voted on February 
2, 2006, to adopt the measures in Amendment 1 and Framework 43, but to 
submit Framework 43 in advance of Amendment 1 in order to establish 
measures for the fishery as soon as possible during the 2006 summer 
season. The proposed rule for Framework 43 was published in the Federal 
Register on June 21, 2006 (71 FR 35600), with public comment through 
July 6, 2006. The final rule was published on August 15, 2006 (71 FR 
46871), and was effective upon publication. The Council intended that 
all of the provisions in Framework 43, which applied to Category 1 
vessels, would apply to limited access herring vessels if and when 
Amendment 1 was implemented. The background section for the final rule 
to Framework 43 included the following text, explaining this 
transition. ``the public should be aware that the Council is proposing 
to revise the Atlantic herring vessel permit requirements in Amendment 
1. Amendment, which has been submitted to NMFS for review, would revise 
the vessel permitting requirements for the herring fishery by 
establishing limited access permits for vessels that fish for large 
amounts of herring, and maintain an open access permit for vessels that 
catch herring incidentally. If the limited access permit measures 
proposed in Amendment 1 are approved and implemented by NMFS, the 
measures proposed in this rule would, in the future, be applicable to 
all vessels issued limited access permits.'' As a result, NMFS proposes 
to revise the Framework 43 regulations to clarify that the bycatch 
provisions, which under Framework 43 apply to Category 1 herring 
vessels, would apply to vessels permitted under the new limited access 
program established under Amendment 1.
    The notice of availability for the DSEIS, which analyzed the 
impacts of all of the measures under consideration in Amendment 1 and 
Framework 43, was published in the Federal Register on September 9, 
2005 (70 FR 53657), with public comment accepted through October 24, 
2005. Public hearings were held in October, in six locations from Maine 
to New Jersey. At its January 31-February 2, 2006, meeting, the Council 
voted to adopt Amendment 1 for submission to NMFS, and it submitted the 
document and associated analyses on May 3, 2006.
    A Notice of Availability (NOA) for Amendment 1, as submitted by the 
Council for review by the Secretary of Commerce, was published in the 
Federal Register on September 6, 2006 (71 FR 52521). The comment period 
on Amendment 1 ends on November 6, 2006. In addition to the 
implementing measures proposed in this rule, Amendment 1 contains 
changes to the herring overfishing definition that are not reflected in 
the regulations.

Proposed Measures

    NMFS is publishing the Council's proposed regulations for the 
measures in Amendment 1, with one exception. Amendment 1 included a 
measure that would have allowed the harvest of herring by fixed gear 
fishermen in Downeast Maine (East of Cutler, Maine-the Downeast Maine 
Fixed Gear Fishery) to be exempt from the TACs that govern the fishery. 
Catch from the Downeast Maine fixed gear fishery (weirs and stop seines 
East of Cutler) would be included as part of the assumed catch from the 
New Brunswick (NB) weir fishery when determining area-specific TACs and 
herring fishery specifications (currently 44 million lb (20,000 mt)). 
During the fishing season, catch from the Downeast Maine Fixed Gear 
Fishery would not be counted against the TAC for Area 1A, and the fixed 
gear fishery would be allowed to continue to operate once the Area 1A 
TAC has been reached. This measure would apply to fixed gear (stop 
seine and weir) catches in waters north of a line drawn from Spruce 
Point (44[deg] 36.2' N. lat and 67[deg] 16.8' W.long), Cross Island, 
Cutler, Maine, due east magnetic to the international boundary with 
Canada. The Council recognized that fixed gear fishing occurs primarily 
in inshore waters, but extending the exemption line throughout the 
Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) was proposed to simplify the 
administration and enforcement of this measure.
    NMFS is not publishing proposed regulations to implement these 
measures because they have been determined, prima facie, to be 
inconsistent with National Standard 1 of the Magnuson-Stevens Act. The 
measures would essentially allow a portion of the fishery to remain 
completely unregulated without corresponding conservation benefits. 
Even though the Council has pointed out that recent catches from the 
fixed gear fishery east of Cutler are virtually non-existent, that does 
not mean that would remain the case. If the fixed-gear landings from 
this area were to increase dramatically, NMFS would have no means of 
regulating that catch to ensure the integrity of the TACs established 
for the fishery. This measure also has been determined to be 
inconsistent with National Standard 3, the requirement to manage an 
individual stock unit throughout its range.

1. Exemption From Vessel Permit Requirements

    This action would continue to allow the following vessels to fish 
for, catch, possess, transport, or land Atlantic herring in or from the 
Exclusive Economic Zone without a Federal permit: A skiff or other 
similar craft used exclusively to deploy the net in a purse seine 
operation conducted by a vessel that is permitted to fish for Atlantic 
herring under the proposed program; and a vessel that possesses herring 
solely for its own use as bait, providing the vessel does not use or 
have on board purse seine, midwater trawl, pelagic gillnet, sink 
gillnet, or bottom trawl gear on any trip in which herring is fished 
for, possessed, or landed, and does not transfer, sell, trade, or 
barter such herring. NMFS has clarified the existing provision for this 
exemption to indicate that such vessels cannot transfer, sell, trade, 
or barter such herring.

2. Limited Access Vesssel Permits

    Amendment 1 would implement two categories of limited access 
permits that would authorize vessels to fish for herring without being 
limited by a possession limit: (1) an All Areas Limited Access Herring 
Permit, which would authorize vessels to fish in all management areas; 
and (2) an Areas 2 and 3 Limited Access Herring Permit, which would 
authorize vessels to fish only in management areas 2 and 3. The limited 
access directed fishery eligibility criteria are intended to qualify 
vessels with significant fishing history and participation in the 
herring fishery. Most of these vessels are currently issued a Category 
1 herring permit that is required of vessels that land, or intend to 
land, > 1.1 million lb (500 mt) of herring annually. These

[[Page 56449]]

vessels land the vast majority of Atlantic herring during each fishing 
year. While vessels that qualify for the limited access directed 
fishery permits would not be restricted by a possession or trip limit 
for herring, they would be subject to the other regulations established 
through the Atlantic Herring FMP. If 95 percent of an area TAC is 
reached in a management area, the directed fishery for herring would be 
closed, and limited access directed fishery permit holders would be 
limited to 2,000 lb (907.2 kg) of herring per trip in that management 
area.
    A vessel would be eligible for either an All Areas Limited Access 
Herring Permit or an Areas 2 and 3 Limited Access Herring Permit if it 
meets one of the two following permit history criteria: The vessel must 
have been issued a Federal herring permit (Category 1 or 2) that was 
valid as of November 10, 2005; or the vessel is replacing a vessel that 
was issued a Federal herring permit (Category 1 or 2) between November 
10, 2003, and November 9, 2005. To qualify as a replacement vessel, the 
replacement vessel and the vessel being replaced must both be owned by 
the same vessel owner; or, if the vessel being replaced was sunk or 
destroyed, the vessel owner must have owned the vessel at the time it 
sand or was destroyed; or, if the vessel being replaced was sold to 
another person, the vessel owner must provide a copy of a written 
agreement between the buyer and the owner/seller documenting that the 
vessel owner/seller retained the herring permit and all herring fishing 
and landings history. This written agreement must be consistent with 
the permit splitting provisions outlined in Section 4.
    To qualify for the All Areas Limited Access Herring Permit, the 
vessel and/or any vessel it replaced must have landed and sold at least 
500 mt of herring in any one calendar year between January 1, 1993, and 
December 31, 2003, as verified by NMFS records or documented through 
dealer receipts. To qualify for an Areas 2 and 3 Limited Access Herring 
Permit, the vessel and/or any vessel it replaced must have landed at 
least 250 mt of herring in any one calendar year between January 1, 
1993 and December 31, 2003, as verified by NMFS records or documented 
through dealer receipts.
    For vessels that meet the limited access permit eligibility 
requirements, but have not been replaced, see section 4, and the 
information about confirmation of permit history (CPH).

3. Limited Access Incidental Catch Herring Permit

    The Council determined that there are a number of vessels that are 
not heavily dependent on herring in terms of a percentage of their 
total catch, but rely on herring as part of an overall harvest 
strategy, and proposes to establish a Limited Access Incidental Catch 
Herring Permit to accommodate such vessels. Many of these vessels have 
an incidental catch of herring while fishing in other small-mesh, high-
volume fisheries for species including Atlantic mackerel, Loligo squid, 
and whiting (silver hake). This measure is intended to provide such 
vessels with an opportunity to land relatively small amounts of herring 
rather than increase the potential for regulatory discarding of herring 
in such fisheries.
    A vessel is eligible for and may be issued either a limited access 
Incidental Catch Herring Permit if it meets one of the two following 
permit history criteria: The vessel must have been issued a Federal 
permit to fish for Atlantic herring, Loligo or Illex squid, mackerel, 
butterfish, and/or whiting (NE multispecies), during the 2005 fishing 
year as of November 10, 2005; or the vessel is replacing a vessel that 
was issued a Federal herring permit (Category 1 or 2) between November 
10, 2003, and November 9, 2005. To qualify as a replacement vessel, the 
replacement vessel and the vessel being replaced must both be owned by 
the same vessel owner; or, if the vessel being replaced was sunk or 
destroyed, the vessel owner must have owned the vessel at the time it 
sank or was destroyed; or, if the vessel being replaced was sold to 
another person, the vessel owner must provide a copy of a written 
agreement between the buyer and the owner/seller documenting that the 
vessel owner/seller retained the herring permit and all herring fishing 
and landings history. This written agreement must be consistent with 
the permit splitting provisions outlined in Section 4.
    To qualify for a limited access incidental catch herring permit, 
the vessel and/or any vessel it replaced must have landed and sold at 
least 33,000 lb (15 mt) of herring in any calendar year between January 
1, 1988, and December 31, 2003, as verified by NMFS records or 
documented through dealer receipts. For vessels that meet the limited 
access permit eligibility requirements, but have not been replaced, see 
section 4, and the information about CPH.
    NMFS requests comments on whether vessels that sank, were destroyed 
or sold in the manner described in the previous paragraph, should be 
required to have been issued a Federal herring permit (Category 1 or 2) 
any time between November 10, 2003, and November 9, 2005. Specifically, 
NMFS would like to know if the Council intended that such a vessel 
should not be allowed to meet the permit requirement if it had been 
issued a Federal permit to fish for Loligo or Illex squid, mackerel, 
butterfish, and/or whiting (NE multispecies), during the 2005 fishing 
year as of November 10, 2005, and have landed at least 33,000 lb (15 
mt) of herring in any calendar year between January 1, 1988, and 
December 31, 2003. If a vessel could qualify for a limited access 
incidental catch permit with a Loligo or Illex squid, mackerel, 
butterfish, and/or whiting (NE multispecies) permit, there appears no 
reason that the requirments should necessarily differ for vessels that 
sank, were destroyed, or were sold.
    Vessels with limited access incidental catch permits would be 
restricted by a possession limit of 55,000 lb (25 mt) of herring and 
limited to one landing of herring per calendar day. If 95 percent of an 
area TAC is reached in a management area, the directed fishery for 
herring would be closed, and limited access incidental catch permit 
holders would be limited to 2,000 lb (907.2 kg) of herring per trip.
    Amendment 1 would allow a vessel to be issued multiple herring 
permits. For instance, a vessel could have landings history sufficient 
to qualify for the Areas 2 and 3 Limited Access Herring Permit, but not 
the All Areas Limited Access Herring Permit. Such a vessel could also 
qualify for a Limited Access Incidental Catch Permit. In this case, the 
vessel could not possess herring in excess of the Limited Access 
Incidental Catch Herring Permit possession limit of 55,000 lb (25 mt) 
if it fishes any part of a trip in Area 1, regardless of whether it 
catches herring from Areas 2 or 3. However, the vessel could catch and 
land herring in excess of 55,000 lb (25 mt) in or from areas 2 and 3, 
provided it stowed its gear while transiting Area 1.

4. Limited Access Vessel Permit Provisions

    Amendment 1 would establish measures to govern future transactions 
related to limited access vessels, such as purchases, sales, or 
reconstruction. These measures would apply to all limited access 
vessels. The provisions proposed in this amendment are consistent with 
those that govern most of the other Northeast region limited access 
fisheries, e.g., there are some differences in the limited access 
program for American lobster.

[[Page 56450]]

Initial Eligibility
    Initial eligibility for a herring limited access permit would have 
to be established during the first year after the implementation of 
Amendment 1. A vessel owner would be required to submit an application 
for a herring limited access permit or CPH within 12 months of the 
effective date of the final regulations.
CPH
    A person who does not currently own a fishing vessel, but who has 
owned a qualifying vessel that has sunk, or been destroyed, or 
transferred to another person, would be required to apply for and 
receive a CPH if the fishing and permit history of such vessel has been 
retained lawfully by the applicant. To be eligible to obtain a CPH, the 
applicant would have to show that the qualifying vessel meets the 
eligibility requirements for the limited access herring permit in 
question, and that all other permit restrictions are satisfied (e.g., 
permit splitting). Issuance of a valid CPH would preserve the 
eligibility of the applicant to apply for a limited access permit for a 
replacement vessel based on the qualifying vessel's fishing and permit 
history at a subsequent time. A CPH would have to be applied for in 
order for the applicant to preserve the limited access eligibility of 
the qualifying vessel. Vessel owners who were issued a CPH could obtain 
a vessel permit for a replacement vessel based upon the previous 
vessel's history that would utilize the CPH consistent with the vessel 
size upgrade restrictions.
    The owner of a qualifying vessel that has sunk, been destroyed, or 
been transferred to another person without the Atlantic herring fishing 
history, but not yet replaced, would be required to apply for a CPH 
within the first year after the implementation of Amendment 1.
Landings History
    Unless NMFS data already demonstrate that a vessel made landings of 
herring that satisfy the eligibility criteria for a limited access 
permit, applicants would have to submit dealer receipts that verify 
landings. Amendment 1 specifies that the owners of pair trawl vessels 
may divide the catch history between the two vessels in the pair 
through third party verification and supplemental information, such as 
vessel trip reports (VTR) or dealer reporting. The two owners must 
apply for a limited access permit jointly and must submit proof that 
they have agreed to the division of landings.
Extension of Qualification Period
    A vessel owner who could prove that a vessel was under 
construction, reconstruction, or was under written contract for 
purchase as of December 31, 2003, and landed the amount of fish 
required by the limited access program as of December 31, 2004, would 
be able to apply for and obtain a limited access permit as long as it 
meets the permit eligibility criteria. This measure would provide such 
vessels with a 1-year extension of the qualification period for the 
landings portion of the eligibility criteria.
Permit Transfers
    An Atlantic herring limited access permit and fishery history would 
be presumed to transfer with a vessel at the time it is bought, sold, 
or otherwise transferred from one owner to another, unless it is 
retained through a written agreement signed by both parties in the 
vessel sale or transfer.
Permit Splitting
    Amendment 1 adopts the permit splitting provision currently in 
effect for other limited access fisheries in the region. Therefore, a 
limited access permit may not be issued to a vessel if the vessel's 
permit or fishing history has been used to qualify another vessel for a 
limited access permit. This means all limited access permits, including 
herring limited access permits, must be transferred as a package when a 
vessel is replaced or sold. Amendment 1 explicitly states that the 
permit-splitting provision is intended to apply to the transfer/sale of 
herring fishing history prior to the implementation of Amendment 1, if 
any limited access permits were issued to the subject vessel. Thus 
vessel owners who sold vessels with limited access permits and retained 
the herring history with the intention of qualifying a different vessel 
for the herring limited access program would not be allowed to do so 
under Amendment 1, unless the limited access permits on the sold vessel 
are permanently relinquished by the owner.
Qualification Restriction
    Consistent with previous limited access programs, no more than one 
vessel would be able to qualify, at any one time, for a limited access 
permit or CPH based on that or another vessel's fishing and permit 
history. If more than one vessel owner claimed eligibility for a 
limited access permit or CPH, based on one vessel's fishing and permit 
history, the Regional Administrator would determine who is entitled to 
qualify for the permit or CPH.
Appeal of Permit Denial
    Amendment 1 specifies an appeals process for applicants who have 
been denied a limited access Atlantic herring permit. Such applicants 
would be able to appeal in writing to the Regional Administrator within 
30 days of the denial, and any such appeal would have to be based on 
the grounds that the information used by the Regional Administrator was 
incorrect.
    The appeals process would allow an opportunity for a hearing before 
a hearing officer designated by the Regional Administrator. The owner 
of a vessel denied a limited access herring permit could fish for 
herring, provided that the denial had been appealed, the appeal was 
pending, and the vessel had on board a letter from the Regional 
Administrator authorizing the vessel to fish under the limited access 
category. The Regional Administrator would issue such a letter for the 
pendency of any appeal. If the appeal was ultimately denied, the 
Regional Administrator would send a notice of final denial to the 
vessel owner; and the authorizing letter would become invalid 5 days 
after receipt of the notice of denial.
Vessel Upgrades
    A vessel could be upgraded in size, whether through refitting or 
replacement, and be eligible to retain or renew a limited access 
permit, only if the upgrade complies with limitations in Amendment 1. 
The vessel's horsepower (HP) could be increased only once, whether 
through refitting or replacement. Such an increase could not exceed 20 
percent of the HP of the vessel's baseline specifications, as 
applicable. The vessel's length, gross registered tonnage (GRT), and 
net tonnage (NT) could be increased only once, whether through 
refitting or replacement. Any increase in any of these three 
specifications of vessel size could not exceed 10 percent of the 
vessel's baseline specifications, as applicable. If any of these three 
specifications is increased, any increase in the other two must be 
performed at the same time. This type of upgrade could be done 
separately from an engine HP upgrade.
    Amendment 1 maintains the existing Herring FMP specification of 
maximum length, size, and HP for vessels engaged in the Atlantic 
herring fishery (165 ft (50.2 meters), 750 GRT (680.3 mt), and 3,000 
HP). In addition, existing regulations that exempt USAP vessels from 
these size limits would be maintained.

[[Page 56451]]

Establishing Vessel Baselines
    A vessel's baseline refers to those specifications (length overall, 
GRT, NT, and HP) from which any future vessel size change is measured. 
The vessel baseline specifications for Atlantic herring vessels issued 
limited access permits would be the specifications of the vessel that 
was initially issued a limited access permit as of the date that the 
initial vessel applied for such a permit. If a vessel owner is 
initially issued a CPH instead of a permit, the vessel that provided 
the CPH eligibility would establish the size baseline against which 
future vessel size limitations would be evaluated.
Vessel Replacements
    The term vessel replacement (vessel replacement), in general, 
refers to replacing an existing limited access vessel with another 
vessel. In addition to addressing increases in vessel size and HP, 
Amendment 1 would establish a restriction that requires that the same 
entity must own both the limited access vessel (or fishing history) 
that is being replaced, and the replacement vessel.
Voluntary Relinquishment of Eligibility
    Amendment 1 includes a provision to allow a vessel owner to 
voluntarily exit a limited access fishery. Such relinquishment would be 
permanent. In some circumstances, it could allow vessel owners to 
choose between different permits with different restrictions without 
being bound by the more restrictive requirement (e.g., lobster permit 
holders may choose to relinquish their other Northeast Region limited 
access permits to avoid being subject to the reporting requirements 
associated with those other permits). If a vessel's limited access 
permit history for the herring fishery is voluntarily relinquished to 
the Regional Administrator, no limited access permit for that fishery 
could ever be reissued or renewed based on that vessel's history.
Permit Renewals and CPH
    Amendment 1 specifies that a vessel owner must maintain the limited 
access permit status for an eligible vessel by renewing the permits on 
an annual basis or applying for issuance of a CPH. A CPH is issued to a 
person who does not currently own a particular fishing vessel, but who 
has legally retained the fishing and permit history of the vessel for 
the purpose of transferring it to a replacement vessel at a future 
date. The CPH provides a benefit to a vessel owner by securing limited 
access eligibility through a registration system when the individual 
does not currently own a vessel.
    A vessel's limited access permit history would be cancelled due to 
the failure to renew, in which case, no limited access permit could 
ever be reissued or renewed based on that vessel's history or to any 
other vessel relying on that vessel's history.
    All limited access permits must be issued on an annual basis by the 
last day of the fishing year for which the permit is required, unless a 
CPH has been issued. A complete application for such permits must be 
received no later than 30 days before the last day of the fishing year.

5. Open Access Vessel Permit and Possession Limit

    Any vessel could be issued an open access incidental catch permit 
that would authorize the possession and landing of up to 6,600 lb (3 
mt) of herring per trip, with a limit of one landing per calendar day. 
When the TAC in a management area is projected to be reached and the 
limited access fishery closes, the possession limit for these vessels 
would be reduced to 2,000 lb (907.2 kg) per trip, with a limit of one 
landing per calendar day, when fishing in the area. Open access vessels 
that land more than 2,000 lb (907.2 kg) of herring in any week would be 
required to report their catches on a weekly basis through the 
Interactive Voice Recording (IVR) reporting program described in 
section 6.
    Amendment 1 requires an Atlantic herring carrier vessel to have an 
Atlantic herring permit, not have any gear on board capable of catching 
or processing herring, and have on board a letter of authorization from 
the Regional Administrator to transport herring caught by another 
fishing vessel. Amendment 1 specified that carrier vessels would not be 
required to qualify for a limited access permit to possess/transport 
herring. NMFS had drafted the regulations to specify that a carrier 
vessel must be issued either an open access or a limited access herring 
permit.

6. Reporting Requirements

    All limited access directed and limited access incidental fishery 
permit holders would be required to report herring catches weekly 
through the IVR call-in system, and to file a negative report if there 
were no catches in a specific week. Amendment 1 would require all 
vessels issued a limited access directed fishery or limited access 
incidental catch permit (with the exception of fixed gear fishermen) to 
install and maintain operable Vessel Monitoring System (VMS) units, and 
to comply with all VMS notification and reporting requirements. Such 
vessels may power down the VMS unit when in port, but must re-power the 
VMS unit and enter an appropriate trip designation prior to leaving 
port.

7. Adjustments to Management Area Boundaries

    Herring management measures, including TACs, are specified for four 
management areas (Areas 1A, 1B, 2, and 3). Amendment 1 would revise the 
area boundaries consistent with recommendations from the Transboundary 
Resource Assessment Committee (TRAC), a group comprised of both U.S. 
and Canadian scientists. The boundary between Areas 1B and 3 would be 
revised to assure that fish caught in Franklin Swell are attributed to 
the GB spawning component of the stock. The Area 2/3 boundary would be 
moved west from 69[deg]00' W. long. to 70'00' W. long. to better relate 
catch to the TRAC conclusion that there are two spawning components of 
the stock: The GOM and GB/Nantucket Shoals components.

8. Maximum Sustainable Yield

    In February 2003, during the development of Amendment 1, the TRAC 
met to try to come to consensus regarding the status of the stock and 
the most appropriate values for biological reference points. The two 
herring assessments presented at the TRAC Meeting produced different 
results, and no overall consensus was reached regarding which 
assessment is most accurate. Consequently, no specific biological 
reference points were provided by the joint peer review group. In the 
face of this scientific uncertainty, the Council decided that it was 
appropriate to set a relatively conservative proxy for MSY in Amendment 
1, until a stock assessment could be completed that specified an 
analytical MSY value. Based on input from the Council's Scientific and 
Statistical Committee (SSC), the Council revised the reference points 
in the overfishing definition for Atlantic herring as follows: MSY = 
220,000 mt; BMSY (BTarget) = 1,100,000 mt; and 
Bthreshold = 550,000 mt. The reference points in the 
Atlantic Herring FMP were: MSY = 317,000 mt; BMSY (BTarget) = 1,100,000 
mt; and Bthreshold = 550,000 mt (the Bthreshold 
established in the FMP is 1/2 BMSY).
    The Amendment 1 document explains that the proposed proxy reference 
points would be revised if a new, peer-reviewed stock assessment 
recommends different reference points. In May 2006, the TRAC reconvened 
and completed another herring assessment. The TRAC

[[Page 56452]]

recommended the following reference points: MSY = 194,000 mt, and Bmsy 
= 629,000 mt. Based on this and the FMP's guidance, BTarget 
would be 629,000 mt, and Bthreshold would be 314,500 mt (1/2 
BMSY). If approved in Amendment 1, these values would become 
the new reference points for the Atlantic herring fishery.

9. Specification of Management Measures Including TACs.

    The Amendment 1 management program includes the specification of 
management measures for 3-year periods. This measure would maintain 
flexibility for the Council to adjust the fishery specifications in the 
interim years. If the Council determines that the specifications should 
be adjusted during the 3-year time period, it could do so during one or 
both of the interim years. No action would be required by the Council 
to maintain the same specifications for all 3 fishing years; Council 
action would only be required if adjustments to the specifications 
during the interim years were to be made.
    Amendment 1 outlines the process for establishing the 
specifications. The Herring Plan Development Team (PDT), which advises 
the Council on technical matters pertaining to herring management, 
would meet with the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commissions' 
(Commission's) Technical Committee (TC) to review the status of the 
stock and the fishery and prepare a Stock Assessment and Fishery 
Evaluation (SAFE) report every 3 years. While a SAFE report would only 
be prepared every three years, the Herring PDT would meet at least once 
during interim years to review the status of the stock relative to the 
overfishing definition, if information is available to do so. When 
conducting a 3-year review and preparing a triennial SAFE Report, the 
PDT/TC would report to the Council/Commission and recommend any 
necessary adjustments to the specifications for the upcoming 3 years. 
Specifications and TACs would be conveyed to NMFS once approved by the 
Council and published for public comment. If determined to be 
consistent with the FMP, final specifications would be implemented.
    Amendment 1 would authorize the Herring PDT, in consultation with 
the Herring Committee, Advisory Panel, and other interested parties, to 
utilize the most appropriate analytical approach for determining the 
area-specific TACs during the fishery specification process, provided 
the PDT justifies its approach. The most appropriate analytical 
approach may be the current approach described in the FMP, the risk 
assessment approach, or another approach developed by the PDT based on 
the best available scientific information. This measure allows the 
Council to fully utilize the best scientific information and 
methodology available when specifications for the herring fishery are 
developed.
    Amendment 1 specifies that the seasonal allocation of the Area 1A 
TAC may be reviewed and revised, if necessary, through the 
specification process. The Area 1A TAC is currently allocated to two 
periods: January-May and June-December. Amendment 1would authorize the 
Council to revise the seasonal allocation, as well as to specify the 
TAC allocation for each seasonal period.

10. TAC Set-Asides to Support Herring-Related Research

    Amendment 1 would authorize the Council, in consultation with the 
Commission, to set aside 0-3 percent of the TAC from any management 
area(s) as a research set aside (RSA) to support herring-related 
research. The RSA would be used to support herring-related research in 
any management area(s), consistent with the research priorities 
identified by the Council. Projects funded under an RSA allocation 
would have to enhance understanding of the fishery resource and/or 
contribute to the body of information upon which management decisions 
are made.
    The Council would determine the specific percentages for the RSA 
and the management area(s) to which it is applied during the fishery 
specification process. Amendment 1 specifies that the directed herring 
fishery would close in a particular management area when it was 
projected that 95 percent of the area TAC would be caught. The 
remaining 5 percent of the TAC would be set aside for catch under a 
2,000-lb (907.2 kg) trip limit. The RSA would come out of the 
allocation for the directed fishery. For example, if the Council set 
aside 3 percent of the Area 1A TAC to support research, then the Area 
1A directed fishery would close when 92 percent of the overall Area TAC 
was projected to be reached.
    The RSA would be administered through a process similar to that 
specified by the Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council in several of 
its fishery management plans. That mechanism would include the 
following elements: Individual research projects may apply for the use 
of more than one herring research set-aside allocation; researchers may 
request that the set-aside be collected separately from the research 
trip or as part of the research trip; and research compensation trips 
would not all necessarily have to be conducted by the same vessel, but 
would have to be conducted in the management area from which the set-
aside was derived.
    Multi-year projects could be funded, since the RSA process is 
intended to be consistent with the Council's proposed 3-year 
specification process. The RSA would have to be utilized in the same 
fishing year in which it was allocated (i.e., RSA and compensation 
trips could not be rolled over into future years). However, the money 
generated from the RSA may be rolled over into, or used to fund 
research in future years, consistent with the multi-year proposal.
    Specification of RSA amounts (percentages) for the upcoming fishing 
years would be incorporated into the Council's fishery specification 
package every 3 years, and submitted to NMFS with additional analysis 
required, as part of the specification package. For each proposal 
cycle, NMFS would publish a Request for Proposals (RFP) that specifies 
research priorities identified by the Council and application 
procedures for funding through the RSA. Since specifications would be 
set for three fishing years, the proposal cycle would also cover 3 
fishing years, unless the Council identifies new/different research 
priorities during the interim years and decides to publish a second 
RFP.
    Research proposals, whenever possible, would be reviewed and 
approved prior to the publication of final quota specifications for the 
upcoming fishing years. In the event that the approved proposals did 
not make use of any or all of the set-asides, NMFS would be authorized 
to release the unutilized portion of the RSA back to its respective 
management area(s) when the final specifications were published. If 
there were unutilized RSA available, NMFS, at the request of the 
Council, could publish another RFP for either the second or third years 
of the three-year specifications. In such case, NMFS would release the 
unutilized portion of the set-aside back to its respective management 
area(s) for the first year of the specifications and any other year 
that yields unutilized RSA after an additional RFP is published. The 
Council also may decide not to publish another RFP, in which case NMFS 
would be authorized to release the unutilized portion of the RSA back 
to its respective management area(s) for all 3 fishing years covered by 
the specifications.

[[Page 56453]]

First Round Following Amendment 1 (2007-2009 Fishery Specifications)
    Under the existing FMP, the Council must develop specifications for 
the 2007 Atlantic herring fishery during the summer/fall 2006. In 
anticipation of Amendment 1 implementation, the specifications will 
also specify multi-year specifications for the 2007-2009 fishing years. 
The timing of both the completion of this amendment and the fishery 
specification process precludes the Council from making a RSA available 
for the 2007 fishing year. However, the Council recommendations for 
2007-2009 may include RSAs for the 2008 and 2009 fishing years. If this 
is the case, the Council would identify research priorities, NMFS would 
publish the RFP, and proposals would be reviewed and approved during 
the 2007 fishing year so that funds could be made available for 
projects at the start of the 2008 fishing year.

11. Purse Seine/Fixed Gear Only Area

    Amendment 1 proposes to prohibit vessels using single or paired 
midwater trawls from fishing for Atlantic herring in Area 1A from June 
1 September 30 of each year. There would be no restrictions on the use 
of midwater trawl gear in Area 1A from October 1 May 31.
    Amendment 1 notes that the Council adopted this measure in response 
to significant and growing concern about the status of the inshore 
component of the herring resource, and the potential impacts of 
midwater trawl fishing effort, which can be highly concentrated at 
times, in the inshore GOM. These concerns relate primarily to the 
importance of herring as a forage species for other fish, marine 
mammals, and seabirds, and the impact that midwater trawl fishing 
effort may be having on localized schools of herring in nearshore 
areas.
    Amendment 1 concluded that data suggest that there may be 
differences in bycatch rates, the species composition of bycatch, and 
bycatch mortality between purse seine and midwater trawl gear. It noted 
that restricting midwater trawl gear in Area 1A during the summer 
months may reduce bycatch and indirectly benefit other recovering 
stocks in the inshore GOM (groundfish stocks, for example). In 
addition, the Council noted that some purse seiners suggest that 
midwater gear disperses herring schools, making it difficult to use 
purse seines. Fixed gear participants argue that midwater gear keeps 
herring schools from coming inshore, limiting fishing opportunities for 
this gear type. The amendment noted that gear conflict stemming from 
any localized impact or perceived impact of midwater trawling on 
herring also may be resolved by this measure.

12. Measures to Address Fixed Gear Fisheries

    Amendment 1 would set aside 500 mt of the Area 1A TAC for the fixed 
gear fisheries in Area 1A (weirs and stop seines) that occur west of 
Cutler, Maine. This set-aside would be available for harvest using 
fixed gear west of Cutler in Area 1A until November 1 each year. If the 
set-aside were not utilized by the fixed gear fisheries west of Cutler 
in Area 1A by November 1, then it would become part of the overall 
allocation for Area 1A. If 95 percent of the Area 1A TAC has already 
been reached by November 1 (and the directed fishery in 1A is therefore 
closed), the reallocation of the set-aside would not result in re-
opening the directed fishery, but would be available for landings under 
the 2,000-lb (907.2-kg) possession limit.
    This measure would require real-time monitoring of fixed gear 
catches in Area 1A. To ensure that this set-aside is effectively 
monitored and enforced, fixed gear fishermen in Area 1A would be 
required to report their herring catches through the IVR reporting 
system. Because fixed gear fishermen fish exclusively in state waters 
and are not required to obtain a Federal limited access permit, this 
IVR reporting requirement has been implemented in state waters by the 
Commission in Amendment 2 to the Interstate FMP for Atlantic Herring, 
and proposed regulations relating to this measure are not included in 
this proposed rule.

13. Measures to Address Bycatch

    As noted above, measures to address bycatch in the herring fishery 
were developed in conjunction with Amendment 1, but submitted 
separately as Framework 43. Framework 43's regulatory requirements 
apply to Category 1 herring vessels. These proposed regulations would 
eliminate the Category 1 vessel permit designation, and implement a 
limited access program. Therefore, this action proposes changes to the 
regulations that make it clear that the measures established in 
Framework 43 would apply to all limited access herring vessels.

14. Regulatory Definition of Midwater Trawl Gear

    This action would modify the regulatory definition of midwater 
trawl gear to reflect the recommendations made by the Council's 
Enforcement Committee to improve the enforceability of the definition 
and clarify the public's understanding of how the gear should be 
fished. The restrictions included in the proposed definition would 
better ensure that the gear cannot be fished on the ocean bottom. This 
measure would improve enforcement because it would provide specific 
references that enforcement agents can use to ensure that the gear is 
being fished properly (as opposed to the current definition, which 
simply states that the gear is designed to fish for, is capable of 
fishing for, or is being used to fish for pelagic species, no portion 
of which is designed to be or is operated in contact with the bottom at 
any time).

15. Framework Measures

    Amendment 1 would maintain the framework adjustment process in the 
FMP. This action would add the following measures to the list of 
measures that could be implemented through a framework adjustment to 
the FMP in the future.
    In-Season Adjustments to TACs: Amendment 1 would clarify that in-
season adjustments to management area TACs could be enacted by the 
Council and NMFS through a framework adjustment.
    Measures to Address Bycatch and Bycatch Monitoring: Amendment 1 
proposes that any management measures to address bycatch and bycatch 
monitoring in the herring fishery could be implemented through a 
framework adjustment to the FMP, as well as through the herring fishery 
specification process.
    TAC Set-Aside Amounts, Provisions, Adjustments: The Council could 
adjust TAC set-asides established in Amendment 1 through a framework 
adjustment, including the amounts and provisions related to RSA and the 
500-mt set-aside for fixed gear fisheries occurring west of Cutler in 
Area 1A.

Classification

    At this time, NMFS has not made a final determination that the FMP/
amendment that this proposed rule would implement is consistent with 
the national standards of the Magnuson-Stevens Act and other applicable 
laws. NMFS, in making that determination, will take into account the 
data, views, and comments received during the comment period.
    The Council prepared and NMFS has adopted a draft FSEIS for 
Amendment 1; a notice of availability was published on April 14, 2003 
(68 FR 17903). The draft FSEIS describes the impacts of the proposed 
management program in detail. The overall conclusion is that the direct 
biological impacts of the management action on the Atlantic

[[Page 56454]]

herring resource will be beneficial in the long term, but are not 
likely to be significant. The proposed measures would maintain the 
existing procedures for establishing the allowed level of annual 
removals from the resource, and the process would incorporate updated 
scientific information as it becomes available.
    Because herring is a primary prey species for seals, porpoises and 
some whales, protected species interactions with this fishery are 
likely. The proposed measures, however, include a limited access 
program that would control capitalization of the fleet, including 
growth of the midwater trawl sector, and a seasonal purse seine/fixed 
gear only area that should, at a minimum, not increase interactions 
with protected species beyond the status quo, and may have indirect 
positive benefits by imposing more controls on the fishery.
    The proposed management measures that would be most likely to 
directly impact fishery-related businesses and communities are the 
proposed limited access program and the PS/FG. Both of these measures 
may affect access to the herring fishery for some vessel owners, and 
could have some socioeconomic impacts. These impacts are further 
described below in the IRFA summary.
    Amendment 1 concludes that additional measures to minimize, 
mitigate or avoid impacts on Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) were not 
necessary, warranted, or practicable as the result of the proposed 
action.
    This proposed rule has been determined to be not significant for 
purposes of Executive Order 12866.
    This proposed rule contains new collection-of-information 
requirements subject to review and approval by the Office of Management 
and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA). This 
requirement has been submitted to OMB for approval under OMB Control 
No. 0648-0202. Under the proposed limited access program, vessel owners 
would be required to submit to NMFS application materials to 
demonstrate their eligibility for a limited access permit. The proposed 
rule also modifies three existing reporting and recordkeeping 
reporting, recordkeeping, or other compliance requirements: (1) The VMS 
requirement for vessels fishing under limited access permits; (2) IVR 
reporting requirements for vessels fishing under the limited access 
permits; and (3) application materials for the RSA program. These 
requirements do not change the reporting burden for respondents, and 
simply modify existing collections approved by OMB under the Northeast 
Region Permit Family of Forms (OMB Control No. 0648-0202).
    The public reporting burden for the new requirements pertaining to 
the limited access program is estimated to average 0.75 hr per 
application, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching 
existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and 
completing and reviewing the collection information.
    Public comment is sought regarding: Whether this proposed 
collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of 
the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall 
have practical utility; the accuracy of the burden estimate; ways to 
enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be 
collected; and ways to minimize the burden of the collection of 
information, including through the use of automated collection 
techniques or other forms of information technology. Send comments on 
these or any other aspects of the collection of information to the 
Regional Administrator (see ADDRESSES), and email to David--
Rostker@omb.eop.gov or fax to (202) 395-7285.
    Notwithstanding any other provision of the law, no person is 
required to respond to, and no person shall be subject to penalty for 
failure to comply with, a collection of information subject to the 
requirements of the PRA, unless that collection of information displays 
a currently valid OMB control number.
    An IRFA was prepared, as required by section 603 of the Regulatory 
Flexibility Act (RFA). The IRFA describes the economic impact this 
proposed rule, if adopted, would have on small entities. A description 
of the action, why it is being considered, and the legal basis for this 
action are contained at the beginning of this section in the preamble 
and in the SUMMARY section of the preamble and in Amendment 1. A copy 
of the IRFA can be obtained from the Council or NMFS (see ADDRESSES) or 
via the Internet at https://www.nero.noaa.gov. A summary of the analysis 
follows:

Description and Estimate of Number of Small Entities to Which the Rule 
Will Apply

    During the 2004 fishing year, 86 vessels landed herring, 40 of 
which averaged more than 2,000 lb (907.2 kg) of herring per trip. There 
are no large entities, as defined in section 601 of the RFA, 
participating in this fishery. Therefore, there are no disproportionate 
economic impacts between large and small entities.

Description of Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Other Compliance 
Requirements

Reporting Requirements

    It is estimated that there will be 200 applicants for a limited 
access herring permit with an average processing time of 45 minutes per 
application for a total burden of 150 hours. Only 90 are expected to 
qualify and consequently renew their application each year. The renewal 
application is estimated to take 30 minutes on average to process for a 
total burden of 45 hours. Up to 10 applicants are expected to appeal 
the denial of their permit application. The appeals process is 
estimated to take 2 hours to complete, on average, with a total burden 
of 20 hours. The 3 year average total public cost burden for permit 
applications, appeals and renewals, at an hourly rate of $15, is 
$1,200.
    New limited access herring vessels would be subject to the same 
replacement, upgrade, and permit history restrictions as other limited 
access vessels. Completion of a replacement or upgrade application 
requires an estimated 3 hours per response. It is estimated that no 
more than 20 of the 90 vessels possessing these limited access permits 
will request a vessel replacement or upgrade annually. This resultant 
burden would be up to 60 hours. Completion of a confirmation of permit 
history (CPH) application requires an estimated 30 minutes per 
response. It is estimated that no more than 10 of the 90 vessels 
possessing a limited access permit will request a CPH annually. The 
resultant burden would be up to 5 hours. At an hourly rate of $15/hour, 
the total public cost burden for replacement/upgrade and CPH 
applications is $975.

Other Compliance Requirements

    The proposed PS/FG area could impose compliance costs on the owners 
of vessels that currently use midwater trawl gear. Some vessel owners 
may decide that it is essential to their fishing operation to continue 
to operate within Area 1A during the June-September period, and in such 
cases these vessel owners would need to re-rig their vessels to use 
purse seine gear. The costs of re-rigging are estimated in Amendment 1 
to range from $300,000 to $500,000, per vessel.

Economic Impacts of the Proposed Action Compared to Significant Non-
selected Alternatives

    The Proposed Action management measures that are most likely to 
directly impact fishery-related businesses and

[[Page 56455]]

communities are the proposed limited access program, the PS/FG area, 
the open access incidental catch permit, and the vessel size upgrade 
restrictions.

Limited Access Program

    The FSEIS estimates the numbers of vessels that would qualify for 
limited access permits under the different alternatives. There were six 
alternatives in addition to the proposed action and Alternative 1 (No 
Action). The alternatives distinguish between limited access directed 
fishery permits, that have no associated possession restrictions, and 
limited access incidental catch permits, that would have associated 
limits on the amount of herring that could be possessed. A combination 
of dealer and logbook data were used to estimate how many vessels would 
qualify under each of the proposed limited access alternatives. The 
FSEIS developed estimates for all the alternatives of the number of 
qualifying vessels, as well as the number of active vessels that would 
qualify. Active vessels were defined as those vessels that averaged 
more than 1 mt of herring per trip from 2002-2004. The analysis of 
active qualifiers was conducted presuming that these vessels would be 
most likely to participate in the fishery after the establishment of a 
limited access program. The FSEIS noted that the estimates of 
qualifying vessels are minimum estimates, as vessel owners may produce 
additional records demonstrating eligibility during the application 
process.
    Under the Proposed Action, 31 vessels (28 active) would qualify for 
limited access directed fishery permits to fish in all management 
areas, and 3 additional vessels (1 active) would qualify for limited 
access directed fishery permits to fish in Areas 2/3 only, resulting in 
34 vessels qualified for directed fishery permits. Another 56 vessels 
would qualify for limited access incidental catch permits with a 25-mt 
possession limit, resulting in a total of 90 vessels qualifying for 
various types of limited access permits.
    Under Alternative 2, 36 vessels (31 active) would qualify for 
limited access directed fishery permits to fish in all management 
areas, and 10 additional vessels (4 active) would qualify for limited 
access directed fishery permits to fish in Areas 2/3 only, resulting in 
46 (35 active) vessels qualified for directed fishery permits. Another 
37 vessels (1 active) would qualify for limited access incidental catch 
permits.
    The eligibility criteria for the limited access directed fishery 
permit for all management areas in Alternative 2 would have required a 
vessel to currently possess a herring permit and have landed at least 
500 mt